Tec, they don't know that the bible supports what we are saying because thy don't know the bible. And I'm glad for the things they've written on this thread that show that. Why? Because so many that stop believing in god claim that they investigated everything and could no longer believe. This shows that this in fact has not been the case with many. They HATE the term "throwing the baby out with the bath water". Many atheists HAVE investigated what the bible teaches outside the context of the wt before making their decision. And I applaud those ones (I.e cofty,NC, and others). But many others haven't. Theylet their anger of the wt bleed over into anger towards God and His Word. They have not learned what the bible really says, as is evident from their lack of understanding even the basics of Judaism and Christianity. This thread is proof of that, especially to those that have thoroughly investigated, atheist or otherwise.
Interesting Jesus cults
by Christ Alone 205 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Christ Alone
Could I make a suggestion? Read a book on Christian theology. You may then be able to better debate your position. And you can avoid those embarrassing comments that "the bible doesn't say that" when it in fact does. It may add to a more vibrant intelligent conversation if you know what Christianity says outside of the wt.
-
NewChapter
So are you going to go farther and antisemeticaly state that the Jews are racist pigs too? Or do you not have the guts to make that statement?
CA, I don't think that mp said anything close to this. You are putting a statement out there and attributing it to mp in a backhanded way. I'm surprised at you. Do you now want to go on a sexist rant about how women are stupid and only good for one thing, or don't you have the guts to make that statement? See how that works? Are you still beating your wife?
As far as racism in the bible and how wonderfully the foreigner was treated, maybe we should ask a Canaanite. Or an Amalekite----as even future generations were to be condemened until none were left. It all depends on point-of-view in this case.
-
Christ Alone
No. I'm bringing out that mp has said that the Jews did not allow anyone else. He called this racist, including the fact that Jesus came to preach to the Jew first. I'm asking what implications that has. Easy to attack Jesus for it, but will he say the same of Jews? I didn't accuse mp of saying that, just asking if he will go to the logical conclusion of his argument. I dot believe the Jews are racist just as Jesus was not.
-
Christ Alone
I'm speaking of foreigners that wished to worship the god of Israel. Not nations that were enemies of Israel.
-
tec
Actually, NC, mP has said this. Perhaps not modern day Jewish people; but from those times, yes.
Israel was to treat a foreigner with respect though. That is in their laws. Whether that always happened or not is another story, but it was SUPPOSED to happen.
Peace,
tammy
-
tec
Some people will latch on to the negative (even if that negative is just a spin they read from some internet place) to confirm their own bias in NOT believing. "If this 'jesus guy' was so terribly bad, then I can't be wrong to not want to believe in or worship him." To even consider all the information that counters their position will bring doubts back, and that is uncomfortable.
Peace,
tammy
-
Christ Alone
Tec, I completely agree. If Jesus was evil, it can't be evil not to believe in him.
-
NewChapter
I'm speaking of foreigners that wished to worship the god of Israel. Not nations that were enemies of Israel.
CA, the only thing that made them enemies of Israel was that they lived their lives, farmed, built homes, had children, conducted business on their own land----and the Hebrews wanted that land. That is what made them enemies. If you are living in your house, and someone comes along and wants your house, because they feel their race or nationality has more of a right to the house you own than you do, then you can call them an enemy, and take their house.
If we are reasonable, it is very likely that the ancient people were racist. At the time, it was not considered wrong or unusual, so judging them by today's standards will always find them lacking. As to being an 'enemy' it went much farther than that with the Amalekites. It was not only those living when they pissed of Israel, but future generations---people that would have had nothing to do with the original complaint. THAT is racist. Choosing a genetic line and claiming it does not deserve to live.
-
NewChapter
Actually, NC, mP has said this. Perhaps not modern day Jewish people; but from those times, yes.
See above. CA used the term anti-semetic. That suggests current. So here---let's change the context.
Europe colonized Africa, with little regard to what the inhabitants had to think of that. They got together, and with no Africans present, divvied out the land and resources to different countries. Why their disregard for the African? Could it be racism?
Americans had slaves and Jim Crow laws. This was driven by racism.
Now does that translate into me calling Europeans and Americans racist? Because I point out their history? Does that make my anti-American or anti-European, as CA suggested that mp may really be anti-Semetic---and used crafty wording to make it seem so? Of course, Tec, you will defend it. I expect no more of you. But had something like that come from me against CA, I'm pretty sure your mecurial opinion of such a comment would change.